tv [untitled] October 31, 2010 3:30am-4:00am PST
that is why there hasn't been that type of involvement to date. >> thank you. commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: i think we mentioned this is all privately funded by the firms involved in it and any other firms that want to join. so it's a lot like a business improvement district so i think that is a good reason why they are the ones who are putting up the funds and they can find out the solutions and they're doing good work, regardless of who's involved with it. so it works for me. >> thank you very much. thank you. >> i will just say two things, one that kim always came to my meetings in the achamber as well as tom so people like tell are familiar with this organization, and i can't speak for him because he's not here but i guess the point is, the fact that there's nobody here in opposition and people who are really involved in transit really care about this stuff i think also speaks volumes. because if there was an issue with this organization, i know we would see people here. >> thank you.
>> commissioner moore? >> i believe that the majority of downtown buildings and developers are represented and somewhere along the line we have to extend the trust that the permit we make certain requirements that these people really tried to work with each other to deliver them and unless we hear otherwise, that there's a kind of a question on their perform earnings i'm sure somebody would be here to speak to that matter so i can really only trust and be sure the department would reveal if there are any questions. i do believe this particular case, if there's any possible gap, it is bridged. commissioner sugaya: what background piece of information then, is this a requirement of the downtown plan or some -- so there is a public responsibility here? >> they're codified sections 163, 164, 165, all adopted as part of the downtown plan for office buildings.
commissioner sugaya: actually, the list, commissioner, in the back has asterisk where's the work program is required by the permit of certain of the buildings. >> i think if i might add, when we decided to try and take on the work requirement issues, you can see most of our buildings were developed before the permit kicked in and yet all of those buildings are participating in it. so we're hopefully trying to really extend the region and intent of what you were trying to accomplish by making to make the program a little bigger than it was. we hope we can do that. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> is think any additional public comment on this? if not, public comment is closed. commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: i vote to approve the management agency of san francisco connects 26 to 29
program summary and authorize the 20 11 to 2021 commute work plan and adopt a resolution for the rising transportation management association connects 20 11-2016 resident employment work plan. >> second. president miguel: on that motion and second commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: aye. >> commissioner sugaya? commissioner sugaya: no. >> and commissioner president miguel? president miguel: aye. >> so moved, those resolutions pass 5-1. for anyone who is interested, the giants just scored on a home run in the bottom of the fifth making it 1-0 at the top of the sixth. >> well done. >> next up commissioners is item 19, case 2010, .0683-t,
amendment to the planning code section -- >> not yet, not yet. go ahead. sorry. announce the item. go ahead. >> amendments to the planning code section 420.1 to 420.5, visitation valley community facilities and infrastructure fee and fund. >> supervisor maxwell, who is the sponsor of this legislation, has asked for this to be continued until november 18th. her staff made a point of telling me that it was not because of the giants' game but because they wanted a little more time to discuss this with the community. >> does that -- sorry. >> i was going to move to continue. >> that's fine. i was just going to ask then should we retain these or can we toss them? because there may be changes, right? >> i expect there will be
changes. >> ok. thank you. >> so i'm going to move to continue item number 19 to november 18th, calendar permitting. >> pardon me. >> seconded. >> i have to ask for public comment, of which i see there is none. >> on the motion of second to continue item 19 to november 18, commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya:? >> aye. >> and commissioner president miguel: president miguel? president miguel: aye. >> so moved, commissioners, which places you on your last regular calendar item or items, case number or items 20-a, b and c, for case numbers 2007.1238 emtr and u, the better streets
plan. >> good afternoon or good evening, commissioners. adam barrett from department staff. the agenda item today before you is the better streets plan and relates actions, you probably remember three weeks ago i gave an informational presentation about the better streets plan and at that time you initiated the general plan amendment relating to the plan. so there are three requested action items before you today relating to the better streets plan. the first motion to adopt the findings. second the resolution to adopt the general planning amendment and third is the resolution to recommend approval of the plans, better streets plan itself and to -- an amendment to the planning code and administrative code. and those last two correspond to the mayor's legislation that was introduced at the board of supervisors. there were two pieces of legislation introduced there. to give a brief r the better streets plan presents a comprehensive set of citywide
guidelines for the design of the pedestrian realm and all of the different functions and roles that it plays. the plan was developed with over 100 public communities at this point, monthly meetings with the community advisory committee over the last three years. we published the draft plan in 2008 and plan revisions in october of 2009 and the final draft this past july. staff prepared a mitigated negative declaration for the project, which is included in the packet for this item as attachment two. the n.n.d., the draft was published on july 28 and was available for public comment until august 17. the final was published on september 18. that relates to the first item before you, the ceqa findings. the process to legislate and adopt a better streets plan has already been initiated. on september 21, the mayor introduced an ordinance,
actually two ordinances at the board of supervisors, one that would amend the administrative code, planning code, public works code relating to the better streets plan and the other relating to amending the general plan. and subsequently at the hearing here at the planning commission on october 7, you voted to initial the general plan amendment. so to go a little more into the three items before you today, the first item is a motion to adopt ceqa findings including the mitigation monitoring and reporting program, the mmrp, which is shown in attachment three and per exhibit a of that draft motion to adopt ceqa findings which is attachment four, you would incorporate the measures into the better streets plan itself such that future projects will be required to implement these mitigation measures as a requirement of their approval and therefore ensure that the plan doesn't have significant
impact so they would be mitigated to a less than significant level. the second item is the resolution to adopt general plan amendments. as mentioned, you initiated these amendments on october 7. the proposed amendments would incorporate the better streets plan into the urban design and transportation elements of the general plan and would make these elements consistent with the best practices in pedestrian and streetscape design that are in the better streets plan and would be reflected in the general plan. these are shown in attachment five and six. in attachment seven is a draft resolution to adopt the planning, the general plan amendments including general plan consistency findings and planning code findings. the last item, the third item is a resolution to approve the better streets plan itself and adopt planning code and administrative code amendments. just briefly, the ordinance introduced had planning code administrative code, public
works code and subdivision code amendments. planning code amendments are brought to you as well as administrative code amendments that have to do with land use issues and that's also before you today. the proposed planning code amendments would establish consistent requirements for street improvements associated with private development. the code is scattered in a number of different sections in the planning code and we have put it all into one section. and the proposed administrative code amendments would amend the existing better streets policy, which is chapter 98.1 of the administrative code, which called for all of the agencies to work together to improve the streets for all of the different functions that streets should play and the amendment would incorporate the better streets plan by reference into the better streets policy and would require that all projects in the public right-of-way conform with the policies and guidelines of the better
streets plan. a summary of these amendments was included in your packet as attachment one. if you have more questions on that, i'd be happy to answer. the draft ordinance the third item before you is included as attachment eight in the resolution and attachment nine. staff is recommending approval of all of these items and i'm happy to answer any questions that you have. president miguel: thank you. is there any public comment on this item? if not, public comment is closed. commissioner sugaya. commissioner sugaya: well, i'm looking forward to adding another couple hundred pages to my zoning quota here in a couple of months when i get the little pact. >> i would say i did add it up actually and there is a lot of text deleted. it does add texas, not a considerable amount because there is a lot that is deleted from other sections. >> my direction to staff to
make sure that we're not unduly adding to the code. >> as long as it still fits in one binder. >> i would like to thank adam and to reflect the fact that the reason that no one is here is because there is so much agreement on this plan, so thank you for all of your great work. not that there is no one here but the three members who are clearly here for a reason, but that's ok. president miguel: commissioner moore. commissioner moore: two reasons why i strongly support all three recommendations in front of us. one, the department now exclusively prints on recycled, noticeably recycled paper and double-sided, and two, because i'm an extremely support for this long overdue street improvement plan. president miguel: commissioner olague. vice president olague: i just wanted to thank, how do you pronounce your last name? >> varat. vice president olague: i want to thank you for your work.
you have worked on a lot of these issues including eastern neighborhoods. you were one of the first persons to work on that even before i was on the commission, you were working on that i want to thank you for all of your good work, i support this. >> thank you. president miguel: i think the director's comment says it all. any time we have something of this really massive import for the city before us, and it really is, i'm not sure everyone out there understands it, and no one is here to complain, that means you have done an unusually complete job. it's greatly appreciated. commissioner olague. vice president olague: i would like to make a motion, i don't know how we do this, separately or -- >> we can take them all together. vice president olague: so i move item 20 a, 20 b, and 20 c.
>> second. >> on that motion for items 20 a, b, and c, commissioner antonini. commissioner antonini: aye. >> commissioner aboard. commissioner borden: aye. >> commissioner sugaya, commission olague, commissioner miguel. aye. >> those are adopted and approved. commissioners, that's the end of our regular calendar. we do have public comment. i do not have any speaker cards, but at this time any member of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction matter of the commission except commission tells. >> my name is daniel. we're planning students at u.c. berkeley and we're just observing the meeting. president miguel: welcome. >> i'm graduating in may. if you have any job opportunities, please let me
know. [laughter] >> thank you. president miguel: thank you. do you have any questions of us? we don't often get planning students here that are interested in hearing, listening and sitting all through this. >> i guess i was personally curious, i'm new to planning actually from a different field and so i wasn't sure how you all are structured and how, if you're appointed or elected or the process. president miguel: commissioners of various commissions are done differently in the city and various planning commissions throughout the state and country are done differently. in san francisco, the mayor
appoints four of the commissioners and they have to be confirmed by a majority of the board of supervisors. the president of the board of supervisors supervisors appoints the other three. these are done on a rotating four-year absolute term and some of us in our first year of serving, some are in second -- a term, rather, and some in the third term of serving. we have, the code does not specify for planning commissioners in san francisco any particular prequalifications, either academic or business. it does for certain of the other commissions. >> so planning background isn't required? president miguel: no, it is taken into consideration obviously in the appointment process and that type of thing, yes. >> one question that comes up
in our class a lot real quick, it just said we wonder about the role of science like particularly when there is a lot of complexity. we talked today, we saw medical science and it came up with health care issues and just in general i guess i'm wondering if that is something that you struggle with and how you, what you tend to rely on when you have to make scientific -- president miguel: it comes to us in two ways. it comes through the work of the department itself and how the department interacts and feeds the information to us, the additional questions we may ask from time to time. we have informational hearings on things many times and then are able to say, yeah, but we need more of. and then also from time to time where items cover more than one
area of subject matter as a city, we may have a joint hearing with rec and park, with the health division, with the redevelopment commission because there are joint concepts with the historic preservation commission where we want to be able to talk among ourselves. >> i would just add to this, the key area science comes up is the environmental impact reports and there is a lot of scientific data within that report and obviously -- well, not obviously, but none of us are scientists in this body so i think in that case, we really rely on experts who look at those sections of the document to point out discrepancies in the science. >> they're heard in a hearing like this? president miguel: correct. >> or in a separate informational briefing? president miguel: yes. >> thanks very much.
commissioner sugaya: in regards to your first question, i'm sorry, while the commission is appointed by the mayor, the mayor appoints me, but only the commission can fire me. >> ok. has that ever happened? >> not yet. >> we can take a vote. >> commissioner moore. commissioner moore: i would like to just clarify for the commission, for the public and the commission an apology to the director. i misinterpreted his expression. he is actually in full support to a candid discussion. sometimes it's hard to always be contrarian, but i appreciate your support in all matters. president miguel: commissioner olague. vice president olague: i do want to mention that having a masochistic streak is part of this in indication you're wondering. president miguel: we encourage to you continue in the field. >> no, no, no. president miguel: is there further general public comment? none appearing. this meeting is closed in honor